Evaluation of the photosensory characteristics of the lateral and pineal eyes of <i>Plioplatecarpus</i> (Squamata, Mosasauridae) based on an exceptionally preserved specimen from the Bearpaw Shale (Campanian, Upper Cretaceous) of southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The skull of Plioplatecarpus possesses large orbits and a large parietal foramen. Although the large orbits suggest that Plioplatecarpus possessed large eyes with enhanced visual performance, none of the previously described skulls include a sclerotic ring, and so it has been impossible in the past to reconstruct their size or optical properties. A recently collected skull with a sclerotic ring preserved in situ provides for the first time the data to do so. The dimensions of the sclerotic ring demonstrate that, although the f-number of the eyeball was not low enough to support the hypothesis that Plioplatecarpus was adapted to low light conditions, the eyeball was nevertheless large and possessed increased visual acuity and sensitivity that enabled the mosasaur to operate efficiently in both light-rich and light-poor conditions and possibly other conditions of reduced visibility. Proportions of this skull also suggest that Plioplatecarpus possessed a relatively wide binocular field of vision, providing stereoscopic vision, and further increasing both acuity and sensitivity, enhancing its ability to effectively detect and track quickly moving objects under a wide range of light conditions. A greatly enlarged parietal foramen implies the presence of a large parietal eye, the significance of which is uncertain, but it may have enhanced the ability to regulate migratory behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".